Darkly Dreaming Dexter Development

Variety reports that Michael C. Hall of  SIX FEET UNDER has signed to star in Showtime’s pilot for DARKLY DREAMING DEXTER, based on the acclaimed novels by Jeff Lindsay. The SIX FEET UNDER connection doesn’t end there… Michael Cuesta, a regular director on the HBO series, will helm the DEXTER pilot.  Dexter is a Miami PD forensics expert who also happens to be a serial killer.

19 thoughts on “Darkly Dreaming Dexter Development”

  1. Wait a minute…is it going to be a series?
    If so, that’s a terrible idea. I really liked the book. bt there’s no way you can create a TV series character out of Dexter without softening him.

    Reply
  2. I can hear the jingle now.
    [Cue cheesy jingle music…]
    Oh, he listens to the killers’ screams/
    At Lecter’s heart with fava beans.
    It’s Darkly Dreaming Dexter

    [VO: Bad imitation of Phil Hartman] DARKLY DREAMING DEXTER, brought to you by OxyClean, to get those tough blood stains out.

    Reply
  3. On the upside, perhaps Michael C. Hall as Dexter can go back in time and find the crack head who abducted David on Six Feet Under and kill him, thus eradicating the possibility that SFU would need to suck so much that season that I forever stopped watching it. Well, forever until I watched Nate die…Oh, and then there was that bird episode, too.

    Reply
  4. I like Tod’s idea… revenge for the downfall of SFU. It was such a good show until that episode. I am also glad to hear that Michael C. Hall is getting some work, I saw that the guy who played Keith on SFU has moved on to some show on Fox next season….

    Reply
  5. It was amazing…for the first season. I lost interest midway through season two. My wife kept watching, but complained every week that the show was getting worse and worse…
    I was afraid DEADWOOD and NIP/TUCK would suffer the same fates, but their seconds seasons were every bit as compelling as their first.

    Reply
  6. I completely disagree. SIX FEET UNDER got better each season. They take huge risks with the material. Billy and Claire. Brenda and her Mom. Nate burying his first wife. David getting beaten up. Amazing scene after amazing scene. Vivid, powerful stuff. Muscular and uncompromising. There are so many great characters. And this show nails what it’s like to grow up a WASP. A post above mentioned hating the bird episode–I LOVED that episode. Fantastic symbolism. You say cliche, I say epiphany. This is Raymond Carver on television. I think the show may possibly resonate more with people who are in the arts, especially Claire’s arc. Her character is authentically funny unlike the banal schtick of DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES.
    I hate NIP/TUCK. I agree that DEADWOOD is brilliant. Also, love the vastly under-rated THE WIRE.

    Reply
  7. You mean to tell me, Freddie, that at the end of last season when Nate went over to his sister-in-laws house and it all became clear that her husband had killed What’s Her Name Who Loves Joe In Say Anything and then proceeded to blow his brains out that you said, “Yeah, fuck yeah, that was really satisfying.” The only good thing about that whole arc is that Mary Roach got some free publicity for Stiff. And David getting car jacked? Jesus. That was awful. Dude, run his ass over, I recall screamig about 1000 times. Ugh. It was great. It was. But last season sucked so fully that even Alan Ball said so, or points to the similar.

    Reply
  8. Tod, I’m pleased to say that I can join you in that Club of Two. Despite the fact that various permutations of Law & Order fill nearly every channel of the dial, I have never watched it once.
    However, I must say that I would gladly watch Law & Order: Meter Maids rather than suffer through anything by Buñuel.

    Reply
  9. Not just me, Tod. My whole immediate family has been glued to this show for its entire run. Your callous attitude toward the scenes you mentioned seems to indicate a fundamental difference between us. I found them gut-wrenching and beautifully executed. That David carjack episode was horrifying and powerful. SFU is brilliant. There’s no accounting for taste, I guess.

    Reply
  10. I wanted to add to what my husband posted earlier. SIX FEET UNDER really got under my skin. Yes, it can be mopey and gleefully macabre. But there’s tremendous heart in this show. Take last week’s episode: I loved Ruth saying, “I don’t want to take the edge off.” I loved Claire’s humor even as she was blindsided by grief. I loved Brenda’s audacity. “What is this, some sort of Quaker thing? You have sex with someone’s husband till he dies, and then you bring them a quiche?” I loved the homage to DON’T LOOK NOW as the specter of the menacing hooded hitchhiker from last season appeared again to David at the green burial. And the subsequent realization that losing Nate meant he had lost his protector. For my husband and I, this was the most moving show we’ve seen since Bobby died on NYPD BLUE. And that is rare company. The characters are truly three-dimensional and I appreciate that in a TV landscape of two-dimensional archetypes. SIX FEET UNDER is gothic. It’s no coincidence that the Fishers live in a gothic revival house. This is Wuthering Heights with a soundtrack by Nirvana. Brilliant television. All the seasons. My hat’s off to Alan Ball.

    Reply
  11. Man, David! I really like your reviews. I’ve agreed with a lot of them. But EXTERMINATING ANGEL!!! Come on, that’s genius.
    Perhaps you’re not a fan of the surrealist tradition. Bunuel’s films are often devastatingly funny, bleak, yet surprisingly tender. Which could be a description of SIX FEET UNDER.

    Reply

Leave a Comment